‘Fashion Police’ Writers Chant On Picket Lines: …
Universal Makes Seven-Figure Deal For ‘The School For …
Steven Soderbergh Will Interrupt Retirement To Direct And …
Cannes: EOne Announces Itself As Player In U.S. …
Will LIN TV Stations Go Dark On Time Warner Cable?
Very Crowded Memorial Weekend Kick-Off: ‘Hangover …
Shareholders Quiz Time Warner Chief On Political Ties And …
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Modern Family’, ‘Law …
Hammond On Cannes: Paramount’s ‘Nebraska’ …
Cannes: J.C. Chandor Sets Next Project ‘A Most …
Hannibal Classics Sets Cast For Nic Cage Pic …
Hammond On Cannes: Robert Redford’s Brave New Role …
Hot Trailer: Jennifer Aniston And Jason Sudeikis’ …
Warner Bros Tells Space Story, From The Bra Designers Who …
Brad Pitt’s Plan B Banner Promotes Jeremy Kleiner To …
Hot Trailer: ‘Don Jon’
Billy Crystal-Starring Comedy From Matt Nix & Larry …
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Dancing With The Stars’ …
Hammond On Cannes: A New Day Comes To The Fest As HBO and …
Cannes: Fleming Reflects And Finds Talented Trio A Breath …
Hot Trailer: ‘Man Of Steel’
Here’s another trailer for J.J. Abrams’ sequel with quite a bit more than we’ve seen in the past, especially for a teaser. It’s attached to Disney’s Oz The Great And Powerful. Paramount’s Star Trek Into Darkness opens May 17th.
Loading ... Loading ...
It just looks different without any lens flare…
Nice editing job but I would rather hold out for the real teaser trailer one forthcoming day. This just looks like a video game ad is all.
Awesome but where are Luke and Leia and Han and Chewie? What about C3PO and R2D2 and Darth Vader? This is a total rip-off without those main characters there’s no way they can call this a Star Wars movie. They are guilty of false advertising and I refuse to pay good money to see this Star Wars rip-off. I am quite confused and very disappointed. I had great faith that JJ would deliver a really excellent Star Wars movie but this is a giant letdown.
Ha.
This looks awesome.
Well, this looks like it could be exciting, but, as a self-identified Trekkie since the early 70s, this looks like Star Trek in name only. Despite the cheesiness of the original series there was a strong thread of humanity underpinning the space opera. They might as well have called this “Mission: Impossible in Space.”
Yes, this movie will make gobs of money since JJ’s broadened Trek’s appeal beyond us fanboys. Maybe Cumberbatch will add some interest, and if the reviews are good I’ll pay to see it in the theater. But I’ll always maintain that Star Trek works best as a TV series.
Space Opera. That’s a great assessment of the original series. I never thought about it in that way. Now that I have that thought in my head it’s become clear that the movies will probably never live up to the potential of the original series. Which is sad, but indicative of the film industry cashing in on name value, as you mentioned.
But does it reveal which villain Benadryl McWafflestix is playing? (and no, John Harrison doesn’t count)
Probably just Khan anyway.
yeah, that’s not Star Trek. At all.
Thank God!
You guys sound like a bunch of old nerds. Get over it. This looks fun. I love the Original Star Trek too but this also looks like a good ride. JJ is going to do a great job with Star Wars.
I couldn’t agree more!
This looks like generic space opera (and generic special effects). One of the strengths of Star Trek was the existence of Star Fleet, with rules, that kept officers from doing whatever they felt like doing; it was always interesting to see the main characters maneuver within these rules. Abrams has said he was not into Star Trek, and it shows.
Apparently the violation of these rules features prominently in the film’s plot, so all has not been ignored.
You old school trek fans are annoying. These newer films are great. They have all the personality and adventure of the old series but they’re action packed and exciting too. I saw Wrath of Kahn recently and that’s almost wall to wall action. What’s the problem when JJ does this?
Yeah, I’m pretty sure you didn’t actually watch WRATH OF KHAN recently, if you’re saying it was “wall to wall action.” Probably too busy playing with your cell phone to look at the TV. The first Abrams movie was horrendously stupid, and I only hope that this new one doesn’t follow suit (they don’t have the excuse of the writers’ strike to hide behind). Recycling Khan does not give me much hope, though.
The whiny Star Trek fanboys complaining here are hilarious. Star Trek in name only? Yeah, you can really tell that from a two minute teaser #eyeroll# It has all the hallmarks of classic Trek. The interchange between Kirk and Spock while piloting the small ship is something Gene Roddenberry himself would have been proud of. JJ Abrams has single-handedly rescued Star Trek from the dull, portentous ailing franchise that it had been since 1998. He has done for Trek what Nolan did for Batman. The guy is a genius.
Nolan did nothing for Batman. The boxoffice receipts for “Batman Begins” 2005 were $374,218,673 worldwide. The boxoffice receipts for Tim Burton’s “Batman,” 1989 were $411,348,924 worldwide. The latter is still heralded as the best of the franchise. The franchise in general has always been below the 500 million mark internationally.
Why there was such a drastic uptick with the Dark Knight movies is a mystery, or perhaps extremely weak competition since most films have become quite drab and predictable including “Dark Knight Rises.” But giving Nolan such credit is like saying Marc Webb credit for “rescuing” the Spiderman franchise.
He made the movies good.
Why do you think they brought him in to assist with Superman?
Box Office aside…Nolan showed how to do a Superhero movie and make it good.
And, who exactly is heralding Burton’s fairybook versions over Nolan’s real world he created?
Roddenberry brought his lawyers and had meetings with director Meyer regarding the militaristic changes to Starfleet (an internal conspiracy) in Star Trek VI and probably wouldn’t have liked what’s going on here. We don’t know what he might have thought. But we can look at the values in his movie (STTMP- by the way, still the top grosser internationally, accounting inflation) and compare to ST2013. And is it necessary to slam Star Trek fans? Also, Trek makes millions for Paramount. It didn’t need saving. The props are probably better known than some other sci-fi characters. Let’s see how long this incarnation lasts.
It’s STAR TREK for the next generation. The ADHD Generation.
Hoping JJ Abrams grabs Cumberbatch and casts him in Star Wars
Oh, puh-leeze. I was a Trekkie before you posters were even born, I’d wager. How about waiting to see the whole thing before passing judgement on whether it’s Trek or not. And for the poster who thought it was Star Wars: You did read the headline, right? Egads…
And, yet, you used the wrong terminology.
It’s “Trekker”.
You’d be surprised how many of us old school Trekkies have always been a bit WTF? about the invented, apparently more-”PC”-for-some-reason “Trekkers.”
Also, the OP was being facetious.
I guess age takes away your powers of identifying sarcasm.
If there wasn’t any CGI would any of these films be remotely interesting or coherent?
I’m a Trek fan from watching TOS reruns when I was a kid and have watched everything since – this may not be the Trek I grew up with, but it’s damn entertaining. I can’t stand it when older Trekkies try to tear down Abrams’ work on the franchise simply because it doesn’t correspond with what they remember. The first movie revived a dead franchise; you don’t like it, ignore it.
I’m also always surprised by just how much Karl Urban manages to channel DeForest Kelley. Best recasting ever, and not one I saw coming.
the original series was written by literate, exciting voices (Ellison, Spinrad, JM Lucas, Bloch, Sturgeon, Matheson) – and made for adults. Abrams was not a fan, hires hacks (Kurtzman, Orci, Lindelof) then aims for 18-24 – and it shows.
What this boils down to is that people like you feel they have ownership over a tv show’s legacy just because you watched it. You are jealous of Abrams. You are jealous he gets to do his Trek and you don’t get to play.
You don’t own anything.
no, what it boils down to, Hanna, is that you have no taste.
All I hear is “Waaaaaaahhhhaahh”.
Taste is subjective you half-wit. People sight “no taste” when they do not have a valid arguement. It’s the adult equivalent of storming out of the sand box and running home crying.
Put your pacifier back in your mouth, fire up your box sets, and stew in your narrow scoped life.
uhm, it’s “cite” not “sight.” so much for being exciting and literate.
THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE!!!!!
Kirk never followed the rules. Go watch any of TOS or the movies
“It’s going to fit” … yeah that’s original.
What a blatant, derivative rip off of similar scenes in ROTJ and ESB. And many other movies. STINO, my friends.
I’m a Trek Fan since I was a kid in the early 80′s and I love the new movies. For those that say its not trek you are just bitter old fans that can’t accept anything new. trek had grown very stale. Just rewatch Nemesis and you’ll see how far it had fallen. Enterprise was horrible until the last year. Star Trek needed a kick in the ass and JJ delivered that kick.
Also, the most popular Trek film of all time is The Wrath of Khan and it also happens to be one of the most action heavy of the franchise. Trek is very suited for TV, but JJ figured out a way to make it really pop off the screen. I can’t wait for this movie and I love that I have no idea what the plot is beyond the basics. And the complaint about the original show having rules and not crossing them is ridiculous. Kirk violated or pushed the prime directive to the side when it suited him. And apparently he does that in this movie and loses his command. That sounds like a story I would see with the originals. Finally, correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t the writers huge Trek fans? It was only JJ that wasn’t a fan growing up if I’m correct.
Geez…how many ‘teasers’ can we get for one movie?
Looks like more childish, special-effects-driven drivel from Junior.
Post-apocalyptic NYC? Check
Hulking grey spaceships? Check
Big explosive fireballs? Check
Jumping off the cliff into the sea so very close to the rocks? Check
Running away from the enemy with mere seconds to lose? Check
Buddy-buddy camaraderie? Check
Flying the spacecraft into really tight chasms? Check
Young buck hero who doesn’t play by the rules & gets a stern talking-to by higher-up older guy? Check
Peripheral chicks who look pretty but that’s about it? Check
Lots & lots of super-expensive CGI effects – explosions, monsters, deep space, awesome spaceships, weird alien planet terrain – but a complete lack of imagination? Check
Any relationship to the truly awesome Star Trek 1960s series? Nope.
bravo. or, as someone said earlier: logical. flawlessly logical.
Captain, John Harrison is NOT who he claims to be. Our records indicate he is a war criminal from the Eugenics Wars of the late 21st century. His real name is…
KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!
Noonien Singh.
Simply put, this is a reboot. All bets are off. The original Trek business was flat and Paramount and J.J. have managed to revitalize and reshape it for a period far, far different than the late 60s.
Sorry daddy, this is not your Star Trek.
obviously, it’s your Star Trek, dumbed down for you. which is why no one will passionately be defending it 40 years from now.
“Sorry daddy, this is not your Star Trek.”
Yes, now it’s your stupid younger brother’s Star Trek. “Daddy’s” Star Trek was smart, relevant and daring. This puerile, infantile crap has no identity of it’s own. You could call it “Space Rangers” and it would be the exact, same thing. You Abrams-boosters who crow about great this “new” Trek is are proof of what’s wrong. Yes, Trek was in a rut, because Rick Berman and company ran the franchise into the ground by making it so distant from Rodenberry’s vision that it was a pathetic, irrelevant farce about time travel and who’s-sleeping-with-whom. Just like Abrams has done, but with tons more SFX.
All right, you rubes love the dumbing down of movies and you demand they become more infantile and idiotic still, we get it! Trek was too smart for you but now that it’s dumbed-down you like it. But notice how none of you can tell us what it is you like? What great moments, scenes, story elements Abrams’ Trek has given us that you adore so much?
That would require too much brains.